David Moores was very clear yesterday in his 3,000-word letter of complaint to the Times about how Tom Hicks and George Gillett have run the club that once was his. "We would never countenance any notion of borrowing against the club to create a phoney wealth for some 'jam today' spending splurge," he said.

Digger's reading of his "immaculate" husbandry is a little different. According to Liverpool's accounts to July 2006 – Moores's last full year as chairman – the club made a £4.257m annual loss. This certainly suggests Liverpool could not afford their previous summer's spree, which amounted to Rafael Benítez making net transfer expenditure of more than £28m.

At the time the club also had to service bank loans, repaying £4.37m over the 12 months. These loans were pretty reasonably priced, with interest payable at less than 5.79%. But the way Moores's club shuffled their debts again suggests that he was dipping into the jam jar.

That year the club funded their repayment of those loans and, apparently, part of the transfer splurge through expensive overdraft debt. In July 2005 overdrafts stood at £7.47m – by the following July they had leapt £12.7m to more than £20m.

But perhaps most pertinently Digger wonders precisely how Moores, who trousered £88m from the sale of Liverpool to Hicks and Gillett, would describe the £5m loan his club drew down in October 2004. Because a note to the club's 2006 accounts is fairly explicit. "An additional loan of £5m was drawn down in October 2004. The principal purpose of the loan was to assist in funding player acquisitions."

United happy to get shirty

While Liverpool struggle to make ends meet, Manchester United, the other club supposedly on their knees financially, seem set to stride from strength to strength. On top of the £303m, 13-year kit deal they have with Nike, United stand to make another small fortune from a 50% profit-share agreement struck with the American firm. Nike sell around 2m United shirts each year, so the club are expected to receive tens of millions of pounds. The money will not come in until the end of the current contract in 2015; perhaps Sir Alex Ferguson may think it a windfall worth hanging on for.

Betfair gag director

Mark Davies, one of the sports-betting industry's most colourful characters, has been silenced. Davies was one of Betfair's founding figures and has for years been managing director with responsibility for external affairs, but is not now permitted to comment on issues relating to the betting industry. The move comes after the appointment of Tessa Murray as corporate communications director. Quite how Davies can retain responsibility for external affairs following Murray's recruitment is unclear – but the edict Betfair has imposed upon its hitherto-most-quoted employee may give a clue.

Warner bother is growing

Jack Warner has ever more on his plate after the United National Congress party he chairs was swept to victory as the best-represented party in a new governing coalition in Trinidad & Tobago. However, despite being tipped for a senior cabinet role, he is not expected to step down from the Fifa executive committee or his presidency of Concacaf and will remain a key figure for England 2018 to court ahead of December's World Cup vote.

Wenlock's identity stolen

It took only two days and a moment of (possibly drunken) late-night inspiration, but already 2012's Olympic mascots, Wenlock and Mandeville, have become the target of internet satire.

At 3.28am last Friday an anonymous joker created the Twitter account @Wenlock_2012. "Wenlock" describes himself thus: "Professional mascot. Got no fingers. Likes: Carolina Klüft, performance‑enhancing drugs, the year 2012. Dislikes: Mandeville, The World Cup, Australians."

So far there has been only one entry, one that confirms the potty-mouthed "mascot" really does not like the World Cup.

London 2012, though, is not amused: "Our lawyers are aware," the organisers say. "And so is the real Wenlock."